Length of initial prescription at hospital discharge and long-term medication adherence for elderly, post-myocardial infarction patients: a population-based interrupted time series study.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence suggests that providing longer duration prescriptions at discharge may improve long-term adherence to secondary preventative cardiac medications among post-myocardial infarction (MI) patients. We implemented and assessed the effects of two hospital-based interventions-(1) standardized prolonged discharge prescription forms (90-day supply with 3 repeats for recommended cardiac medications) plus education and (2) education only-on long-term cardiac medication adherence among elderly patients post-MI. METHODS: We conducted an interrupted time series study of all post-MI patients aged 65-104 years in Ontario, Canada, discharged from hospital between September 2015 and August 2018 with ≥ 1 dispensation(s) for a statin, beta blocker, angiotensin system inhibitor, and/or secondary antiplatelet within 7 days post-discharge. The standardized prolonged discharge prescription forms plus education and education-only interventions were implemented at 2 (1,414 patients) and 4 (926 patients) non-randomly selected hospitals in September 2017 for 12 months, with all other Ontario hospitals (n = 143; 18,556 patients) comprising an external control group. The primary outcome, long-term cardiac medication adherence, was defined at the patient-level as an average proportion of days covered (over 1-year post-discharge) ≥ 80% across cardiac medication classes dispensed at their index fill. Primary outcome data were aggregated within hospital groups (intervention 1, 2, or control) to monthly proportions and independently analyzed using segmented regression to evaluate intervention effects. A process evaluation was conducted to assess intervention fidelity. RESULTS: At 12 months post-implementation, there was no statistically significant effect on long-term cardiac medication adherence for either intervention-standardized prolonged discharge prescription forms plus education (5.4%; 95% CI - 6.4%, 17.2%) or education only (1.0%; 95% CI - 28.6%, 30.6%)-over and above the counterfactual trend; similarly, no change was observed in the control group (- 0.3%; 95% CI - 3.6%, 3.1%). During the intervention period, only 10.8% of patients in the intervention groups received ≥ 90 days, on average, for cardiac medications at their index fill. CONCLUSIONS: Recognizing intervention fidelity was low at the pharmacy level, and no statistically significant post-implementation differences in adherence were found, the trends in this study-coupled with other published retrospective analyses of administrative data-support further evaluation of this simple intervention to improve long-term adherence to cardiac medications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03257579 , registered June 16, 2017 Protocol available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33146624/ .

Upstream anticoagulation for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the TOTAL trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the relationship between preprocedural anticoagulation use and clinical and angiographic outcomes. BACKGROUND: For patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the optimal timing of anticoagulant administration remains uncertain. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the TOTAL trial were stratified based on whether or not they had received any parenteral anticoagulant prior to randomization and PCI. Baseline and procedural characteristics were compared. For one-year clinical outcomes, Cox proportional modeling adjusted on a propensity score was used to analyze differences between groups. Angiographic endpoints were analyzed by logistic regression models adjusted for propensity scores. RESULTS: In the trial, 10,064 patients were enrolled and underwent PCI. Preprocedural anticoagulation was used in 6,381 patients (63%).The most common anticoagulant was intravenous unfractionated heparin (5,188, 81%). Patients who received preprocedural anticoagulation had higher rates of TIMI-2-3 or TIMI-3 flow and lower grades of thrombus prior to PCI. Pretreatment with anticoagulation was associated with lower use of bailout thrombectomy, GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and intra-aortic balloon pump. After adjustment, preprocedural anticoagulation was associated with lower rates of CABG and minor bleeding at 1 year but there were no significant differences in death, stroke, recurrent MI, cardiogenic shock, or congestive heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: Preprocedural anticoagulation is associated with improved flow and reduced thrombus in the IRA prior to PCI, less bailout thrombectomy during PCI but no difference in death, recurrent infarction, or heart failure at 1 year.

Association Between Adherence to Fractional Flow Reserve Treatment Thresholds and Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.

Importance: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is an invasive measurement used to assess the potential of a coronary stenosis to induce myocardial ischemia and guide decisions for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It is not known whether established FFR thresholds for PCI are adhered to in routine interventional practice and whether adherence to these thresholds is associated with better clinical outcomes. Objective: To assess the adherence to evidence-based FFR thresholds for PCI and its association with clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective, multicenter, population-based cohort study of adults with coronary artery disease undergoing single-vessel FFR assessment (excluding ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) from April 1, 2013, to March 31, 2018, in Ontario, Canada, and followed up until March 31, 2019, was conducted. Two separate cohorts were created based on FFR thresholds (≤0.80 as ischemic and >0.80 as nonischemic). Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to account for treatment selection bias. Exposures: PCI vs no PCI. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined by death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or urgent coronary revascularization. Results: There were 9106 patients (mean [SD] age, 65 [10.6] years; 35.3% female) who underwent single-vessel FFR measurement. Among 2693 patients with an ischemic FFR, 75.3% received PCI and 24.7% were treated only with medical therapy. In the ischemic FFR cohort, PCI was associated with a significantly lower rate and hazard of MACE at 5 years compared with no PCI (31.5% vs 39.1%; hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.63-0.94]). Among 6413 patients with a nonischemic FFR, 12.6% received PCI and 87.4% were treated with medical therapy only. PCI was associated with a significantly higher rate and hazard of MACE at 5 years compared with no PCI (33.3% vs 24.4%; HR, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.14-1.65]) in this cohort. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with coronary artery disease who underwent single-vessel FFR measurement in routine clinical practice, performing PCI, compared with not performing PCI, was significantly associated with a lower rate of MACE for ischemic lesions and a higher rate of MACE for nonischemic lesions. These findings support the performance of PCI procedures according to evidence-based FFR thresholds.

Randomized trial of primary PCI with or without routine manual thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: During primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), manual thrombectomy may reduce distal embolization and thus improve microvascular perfusion. Small trials have suggested that thrombectomy improves surrogate and clinical outcomes, but a larger trial has reported conflicting results. METHODS: We randomly assigned 10,732 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary PCI to a strategy of routine upfront manual thrombectomy versus PCI alone. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV heart failure within 180 days. The key safety outcome was stroke within 30 days. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 347 of 5033 patients (6.9%) in the thrombectomy group versus 351 of 5030 patients (7.0%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio in the thrombectomy group, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.15; P=0.86). The rates of cardiovascular death (3.1% with thrombectomy vs. 3.5% with PCI alone; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.12; P=0.34) and the primary outcome plus stent thrombosis or target-vessel revascularization (9.9% vs. 9.8%; hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.14; P=0.95) were also similar. Stroke within 30 days occurred in 33 patients (0.7%) in the thrombectomy group versus 16 patients (0.3%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.13 to 3.75; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI who were undergoing primary PCI, routine manual thrombectomy, as compared with PCI alone, did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or NYHA class IV heart failure within 180 days but was associated with an increased rate of stroke within 30 days. (Funded by Medtronic and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; TOTAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149044.).

Factors associated with door-in to door-out delays among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients transferred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Compared to ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients who present at centres with catheterization facilities, those transferred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have substantially longer door-in to door-out (DIDO) times, where DIDO is defined as the time interval from arrival at a non-PCI hospital, to transfer to a PCI hospital. We aimed to identify potentially modifiable factors to improve DIDO times in Ontario, Canada and to assess the impact of DIDO times on 30-day mortality. METHODS: A population-based, retrospective cohort study of 966 STEMI patients transferred for primary PCI in Ontario in 2012 was conducted. Baseline factors were examined across timely DIDO status. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine independent predictors of timely DIDO as well as the association between DIDO times and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: The median DIDO time was 55 min, with 20.1% of patients achieving the recommended DIDO benchmark of ≤30 min. Age (OR> 75 vs 18-55 0.30, 95% CI: 0.16-0.56), symptom-to-first medical contact (FMC) time (OR61-120mins vs < 60mins 0.60, 95% CI: 0.39-0.90; OR>120mins vs < 60mins 0.53, 95% CI:0.35-0.81) and emergency medical services transport with a pre-hospital electrocardiogram (ECG) (OREMS transport + ECG vs self-transport 2.63, 95% CI:1.59-4.35) were the strongest predictors of timely DIDO. Patients with timely ECG were more likely to have recommended DIDO times (33.0% vs 12.3%; P < 0.001). A significantly higher proportion of those who met the DIDO benchmark had timely FMC-to-balloon times (78.7% vs 27.4%; P < 0.001). Compared to patients with DIDO time ≤ 30 min, those with DIDO times > 90 min had significantly higher adjusted 30-day mortality rates (OR 2.82, 95% CI:1.10-7.19). CONCLUSIONS: While benchmark DIDO times were still rarely achieved in the province, we identified several potentially modifiable factors in the STEMI system that might be targeted to improve DIDO times. Our findings that patients who received a pre-hospital ECG were still being transferred to non-PCI capable centres suggest strategies addressing this gap may improve patient outcomes.

Outcomes after thrombus aspiration for ST elevation myocardial infarction: 1-year follow-up of the prospective randomised TOTAL trial.

BACKGROUND: Two large trials have reported contradictory results at 1 year after thrombus aspiration in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In a 1-year follow-up of the largest randomised trial of thrombus aspiration, we aimed to clarify the longer-term benefits, to help guide clinical practice. METHODS: The trial of routine aspiration ThrOmbecTomy with PCI versus PCI ALone in Patients with STEMI (TOTAL) was a prospective, randomised, investigator-initiated trial of routine manual thrombectomy versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) alone in 10,732 patients with STEMI. Eligible adult patients (aged ≥18 years) from 87 hospitals in 20 countries were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) within 12 h of symptom onset to receive routine manual thrombectomy with PCI or PCI alone. Permuted block randomisation (with variable block size) was done by a 24 h computerised central system, and was stratified by centre. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The trial did not show a difference at 180 days in the primary outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure. However, the results showed improvements in the surrogate outcomes of ST segment resolution and distal embolisation, but whether or not this finding would translate into a longer term benefit remained unclear. In this longer-term follow-up of the TOTAL study, we report the results on the primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure) and secondary outcomes at 1 year. Analyses of the primary outcome were by modified intention to treat and only included patients who underwent index PCI. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01149044. FINDINGS: Between Aug 5, 2010, and July 25, 2014, 10,732 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to thrombectomy followed by PCI (n=5372) or to PCI alone (n=5360). After exclusions of patients who did not undergo PCI in each group (337 in the PCI and thrombectomy group and 331 in the PCI alone group), the final study population comprised 10,064 patients (5035 thrombectomy and 5029 PCI alone). The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 395 (8%) of 5035 patients in the thrombectomy group compared with 394 (8%) of 5029 in the PCI alone group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·00 [95% CI 0·87-1·15], p=0·99). Cardiovascular death within 1 year occurred in 179 (4%) of the thrombectomy group and in 192 (4%) of 5029 in the PCI alone group (HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·76-1·14], p=0·48). The key safety outcome, stroke within 1 year, occurred in 60 patients (1·2%) in the thrombectomy group compared with 36 (0·7%) in the PCI alone group (HR 1·66 [95% CI 1·10-2·51], p=0·015). INTERPRETATION: Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for STEMI did not reduce longer-term clinical outcomes and might be associated with an increase in stroke. As a result, thrombus aspiration can no longer be recommended as a routine strategy in STEMI. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canadian Network and Centre for Trials Internationally, and Medtronic Inc.

Clinical outcomes after trans-catheter aortic valve replacement in men and women in Ontario, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate sex-differences in outcomes after trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in a population-based cohort from Ontario, Canada. BACKGROUND: Prior studies comparing outcomes in men and women after TAVR have yielded divergent results. Some studies have suggested that women have better survival than men while others have not corroborated this finding. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted using chart abstraction data on all TAVR procedures performed between 2007 and 2013 in Ontario, Canada. Patients who had emergency TAVR procedures were excluded. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30-days and 1-year. Secondary outcomes included mortality at last follow-up, cause-specific, and all-cause hospital readmission. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using propensity score was used to adjust for baseline differences between men and women. RESULTS: The final study cohort consisted of 453 women and 546 men with a mean follow-up of 3.5 years. Women were generally older and more frail but had less comorbid conditions. Women had lower unadjusted mean EuroScores (7% ± 5% vs 8% ± 7%; P = 0.008), but underwent significantly more trans-apical procedures (26.5% vs 19.2%; P = 0.006) than men. After IPTW, the groups were well balanced. Although mortality was numerically higher for women at 30-days (7.2% vs 5.4%), this was not statistically significant (P = 0.34). At 1-year, there was no difference in mortality (18.2% vs 19.2%; P = 0.85). There were no significant differences in all-cause readmission. CONCLUSION: In this population-based cohort including all patients undergoing TAVR, mortality or all-cause readmission were not significantly different between men and women. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Cluster randomized controlled trial of Delayed Educational Reminders for Long-term Medication Adherence in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (DERLA-STEMI).

BACKGROUND: Discontinuation of guideline-recommended cardiac medications post-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is common and associated with increased mortality. DERLA-STEMI tested an intervention to improve long-term adherence to cardiac medications post-STEMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between September 2011 and December 2012, STEMI patients from one health region in Ontario, who underwent an angiogram during their admission and survived to discharge, were cluster randomized (by primary care provider) to intervention or control. The intervention was an automated system of personalized, educational-reminders sent to the patient and their family physician, urging long-term use of secondary-prevention medications. Interventions were mailed at 1, 2, 5, 8, and 11 months after discharge. A total of 852 eligible participants were randomized to intervention (n = 424, 287 clusters) and control (n = 428, 295 clusters); 87% completed a 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome, defined as the proportion of participants taking (persistence) all 4-cardiovascular medication classes (acetylsalicylic acid, angiotensin blockers, statin, and ß-blocker) at 12 months, was 58.4% (intervention) and 58.9% (control; adjusted odds ratio 1.03, 95% CI 0.77-1.36). Medication adherence, as assessed by the Morisky Medication Adherence Score, was statistically significantly better in the intervention group as compared with control (65.3% vs 58.0%, adjusted odds ratio 1.35, 95% CI 1.01-1.81). CONCLUSION: The results suggest suboptimal use of 4 of 4 cardiac medication classes at 12 months. There was no significant difference compared with usual care in the persistence to guideline-recommended medications post-STEMI when participants (and their family physicians) receive repeated postal reminders.

Effects of withdrawing vs continuing renin-angiotensin blockers on incidence of acute kidney injury in patients with renal insufficiency undergoing cardiac catheterization: Results from the Angiotensin Converting Enzyme Inhibitor/Angiotensin Receptor Blocker and Contrast Induced Nephropathy in Patients Receiving Cardiac Catheterization (CAPTAIN) trial.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear if holding angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) prior to coronary angiography reduces contrast-induced acute kidney injury (AKI). We undertook a randomized trial to investigate the effect of holding ACEI/ARB therapy prior to coronary angiography on the incidence of AKI. METHODS: We randomly assigned 208 patients with moderate renal insufficiency (creatinine ≥ 1.7mg/dL within 3 months and/or documented creatinine ≥ 1.5mg/dL within 1 week before cardiac catheterization) to hold ACEI/ARB ≥24 hours preprocedure or continue ACEI/ARB. The primary outcome was the incidence of AKI defined as an absolute rise in serum creatinine of ≥0.5mg/dL from baseline and/or a relative rise in serum creatinine of ≥25% compared with baseline measured at 48 to 96 hours postcardiac catheterization. RESULTS: All patients were taking an ACEI (72.1%) or ARB (27.9%) prior to randomization. At 48 to 96 hours, the primary outcome occurred in 18.4% of patients who continued ACEI/ARB compared with 10.9% of the patients who held ACEI/ARB (hazard ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.30-1.19, P = .16). In a prespecified secondary outcome, there was a lower rise in mean serum creatinine after the procedure in patients who held ACEI/ARB (0.3 ± 0.5 vs 0.1 ± 0.3mg/dL, P = .03). The clinical composite of death, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, congestive heart failure, rehospitalization for cardiovascular cause, or need for dialysis preprocedure occurred in 3.9% who continued ACEI/ARB compared with 0% who held the ACEI/ARB (hazard ratio 0.11, 95% CI 0.01-2.96, P = .06). CONCLUSION: In this pilot study of patients with moderate renal insufficiency undergoing cardiac catheterization, with-holding ACEI/ARB resulted in a non-significant reduction in contrast-induced AKI and a significant reduction in post-procedural rise of creatinine. This low cost intervention could be considered when referring a patient for cardiac catheterization.

Advanced chronic kidney disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insights on clinical outcomes and prognostic markers from a large cohort of patients.

AIM: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) on early and late outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and to evaluate the predictive factors of poorer outcomes in such patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a multicentre study including a total of 2075 consecutive patients who had undergone TAVI. Patients were grouped according the estimated glomerular filtration rate as follows: CKD stage 1-2 (≥60 mL/min/1.73 m(2); n = 950), stage 3 (30-59 mL/min/1.73 m(2); n = 924), stage 4 (15-29 mL/min/1.73 m(2); n = 134) and stage 5 (<15 mL/min/1.73 m² or dialysis; n = 67). Clinical outcomes were evaluated at 30-days and at follow-up (median of 15 [6-29] months) and defined according to the VARC criteria. Advanced CKD (stage 4-5) was an independent predictor of 30-day major/life-threatening bleeding (P = 0.001) and mortality (P = 0.027), and late overall, cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality (P < 0.01 for all). Pre-existing atrial fibrillation (HR: 2.29, 95% CI: 1.47-3.58, P = 0.001) and dialysis therapy (HR: 1.86, 95% CI: 1.17-2.97, P = 0.009) were the predictors of mortality in advanced CKD patients, with a mortality rate as high as 71% at 1-year follow-up in those patients with these 2 factors. Advanced CKD patients who had survived at 1-year follow-up exhibited both a significant improvement in NYHA class (P < 0.001) and no deterioration in valve hemodynamics (P = NS for changes in mean gradient and valve area over time). CONCLUSIONS: Advanced CKD was associated with a higher rate of early and late mortality and bleeding events following TAVI, with AF and dialysis therapy determining a higher risk in these patients. The mortality rate of patients with both factors was unacceptably high and this should be taken into account in the clinical decision-making process in this challenging group of patients.

New-onset atrial fibrillation detected by ambulatory ECG monitoring after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the occurrence of subclinical new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of subclinical NOAF after TAVI. METHODS: This was a multicentre study, including patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and no previous atrial fibrillation undergoing TAVI, with continuous ambulatory electrocardiogram (AECG) monitoring after TAVI. RESULTS: A total of 700 patients (79±8 years, 49% female, Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 2.9% [1.9-4.0]) undergoing transarterial TAVI were included (85% balloon-expandable valves). AECG was started 1 (0-1) day after TAVI (monitoring time: 14121314 days). NOAF was detected in 49 patients (7%), with a median duration of 185 (43-421) minutes (atrial fibrillation burden of 0.7% [0.3-2.8]). Anticoagulation was started in 25 NOAF patients (51%). No differences were found in baseline or procedural characteristics, except for a higher AS severity in the NOAF group (peak gradient: no NOAF: 71.9±23.5 mmHg vs NOAF: 85.2±23.8 mmHg; p=0.024; mean gradient: no NOAF: 44.4±14.7 mmHg vs NOAF: 53.8±16.8 mmHg; p=0.004). In the multivariable analysis, the baseline mean transaortic gradient was associated with a higher risk of NOAF after TAVI (odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.06 for each mmHg; p=0.006). There were no differences between groups in all-cause mortality (no NOAF: 4.7% vs NOAF: 0%; p=0.122), stroke (no NOAF: 1.4% vs NOAF: 2.0%; p=0.723), or bleeding (no NOAF: 1.9% vs NOAF: 4.1%; p=0.288) from the 30-day to 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: NOAF detected with AECG occurred in 7% of TAVI recipients and was associated with a higher AS severity. NOAF detection determined the start of anticoagulation therapy in about half of the patients, and it was not associated with an increased risk of clinical events at 1-year follow-up.

SYNERGY-Everolimus-Eluting Stent With a Bioabsorbable Polymer in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: CLEAR SYNERGY OASIS-9 Registry.

Our objective was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the SYNERGY stent (Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, Massachusetts) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The only drug-eluting stent approved for treatment of STEMI by the Food and Drug Administration is the Taxus stent (Boston Scientific) which is no longer commercially available, so further data are needed. The CLEAR (Colchicine and spironolactone in patients with myocardial infarction) SYNERGY stent registry was embedded into a larger randomized trial of patients with STEMI (n = 7,000), comparing colchicine versus placebo and spironolactone versus placebo. The primary outcome for the SYNERGY stent registry is major adverse cardiac events (MACE) as defined by cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, or unplanned ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization within 12 months. We estimated a MACE rate of 6.3% at 12 months after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI based on the Thrombectomy vs percutaneous coronary intervention alone in STEMI (TOTAL) trial. Success was defined as upper bound of confidence interval (CI) to be less than the performance goal of 9.45%. Overall, 733 patients were enrolled from 8 countries with a mean age 60 years, 19.4% diabetes mellitus, 41.3% anterior MI, and median door-to-balloon time of 72 minutes. The MACE rate was 4.8% (95% CI 3.2 to 6.3%) at 12 months which met the success criteria against performance goal of 9.45%. The rates of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, or target vessel revascularization were 2.7%, 1.9%, 1.0%, respectively. The rates of acute definite stent thrombosis were 0.3%, subacute 0.4%, late 0.4%, and cumulative stent thrombosis of 1.1% at 12 months. In conclusion, the SYNERGY stent in STEMI performed well and was successful compared with the performance goal based on previous trials.

Ultrasound-Guided Transfemoral Access for Coronary Procedures: A Pooled Learning Curve Analysis From the FAUST and UNIVERSAL Trials.

BACKGROUND: The learning curve for new operators performing ultrasound-guided transfemoral access (TFA) remains uncertain. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of the FAUST (Femoral Arterial Access With Ultrasound Trial) and UNIVERSAL (Routine Ultrasound Guidance for Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures) trials, both multicenter randomized controlled trials of 1:1 ultrasound-guided versus non-ultrasound-guided TFA for coronary procedures. Outcomes included the composite of major bleeding or vascular complications and successful common femoral artery cannulation. Participants were stratified by the operators' accrued case volume. We used adjusted repeated-measurement logistic regression, with random intercepts for operator clustering, for comparison against the non-ultrasound-guided TFA group and to model the learning curve. RESULTS: The FAUST and UNIVERSAL trials randomized a total of 1624 patients, of which 810 were randomized to non-ultrasound-guided TFA and 814 to ultrasound-guided TFA (cases 1-10, 391; 11-20, 183; and >20, 240). Participants who had operators who performed >20 ultrasound-guided TFAs had a decreased risk for the primary end point (5/240 [2.1%] versus 64/810 [7.9%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.09-0.61]) compared with non-ultrasound-guided TFA. Operators who performed >20 ultrasound-guided procedures had increased odds of successfully cannulating the common femoral artery (224/246 [91.1%] versus 327/382 [85.6%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.08-2.89]) compared with non-ultrasound-guided TFA. The learning curve plots demonstrated growing competence with increasing accrued cases. CONCLUSIONS: New operators should perform at least 20 ultrasound-guided TFA to decrease access site complications and increase proper cannulation compared with non-ultrasound-guided TFA. Additional accrued cases may lead to increased proficiency. Training programs should consider these findings in the transradial era.

Predictors of normal coronary arteries at coronary angiography.

BACKGROUND: Coronary angiograms are important in the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected coronary artery disease. However, little is known about the clinical predictors of normal angiograms and whether this rate varies across different cardiac centers in Ontario. METHODS: We conducted a study using the Cardiac Care Network Variations in Revascularization Practice in Ontario database of 2,718 patients undergoing an index cardiac catheterization for an indication of stable angina between April 2006 and March 2007 at one of 17 cardiac hospitals in Ontario. We determined predictors of normal coronary angiograms (0% coronary stenosis) and compared rates of patients with normal catheterizations across centers. RESULTS: Overall, 41.9% of patients with stable angina had a normal catheterization. A multivariate model demonstrated female gender to be the strongest predictor of a normal angiogram (odds ratio 3.55, 95% CI 2.93-4.28). In addition, atypical ischemic symptoms or no symptoms, the absence of diabetes, hyperlipidemia, smoking history, peripheral vascular disease, and angiography performed at a nonteaching site were associated with higher rates of normal catheterization. The rate of normal angiograms studied varied from 18.4% to 76.9% across hospitals and was more common in community compared with academic settings (47.1% vs 35.4%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The absence of traditional cardiac risk factors, female gender, and lack of typical angina symptoms are all associated with a higher frequency of normal cardiac catheterizations. The wide variation in Ontario in the frequency of normal angiograms in patients with stable angina suggests that there are opportunities to improve patient case selection.

Centralized Triage of Suspected Coronary Artery Disease Using Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography to Optimize the Diagnostic Yield of Invasive Angiography.

Background: Coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) is preferable to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) for coronary artery disease (CAD) diagnosis in elective patients without known CAD. Methods: We conducted a nonrandomized interventional study involving 2 tertiary care centres in Ontario. From July 2018 to February 2020, outpatients referred for elective ICA were identified through a centralized triage process and were recommended to undergo CCTA first instead of ICA. Patients with borderline or obstructive CAD on CCTA were recommended to undergo subsequent ICA. Intervention acceptability, fidelity, and effectiveness were assessed. Results: A total of 226 patients were screened, with 186 confirmed to be eligible, of whom 166 had patient and physician approval to proceed with CCTA (89% acceptability). Among consenting patients, 156 (94%) underwent CCTA first; 43 (28%) had borderline/obstructive CAD on CCTA, and only 1 with normal/nonobstructive CAD on CCTA was referred for subsequent ICA against protocol (99% fidelity). Overall, 119 of 156 CCTA-first patients did not have ICA within the following 90 days (i.e., 76% potentially avoided ICA, due to the intervention). Among the 36 who underwent ICA post-CCTA per protocol, 24 had obstructive CAD (66.7% diagnostic yield). If all patients who were referred for and underwent ICA at either centre between July 2016 and February 2020 (n = 694 pre-implementation; n = 333 post-implementation) had had CCTA first, an additional 42 patients per 100 would have had an obstructive CAD finding on their ICA (95% confidence interval = 26-59). Conclusion: A centralized triage process, in which elective outpatients referred for ICA are instead referred for CCTA first, appears to be acceptable and effective in diagnosing obstructive CAD and improving efficiencies in our healthcare system.

Contexte: La coronarographie par tomodensitométrie (coro-TDM) est préférable à la coronarographie invasive chez les patients sans coronaropathie connue chez qui le diagnostic d'une coronaropathie n'est pas urgent. Méthodologie: Nous avons réalisé une étude interventionnelle non randomisée dans deux centres de soins tertiaires en Ontario. Les patients ambulatoires pour qui une coronarographie invasive non urgente a été demandée entre juillet 2018 et février 2020 ont été recensés par un processus centralisé de triage et se sont fait recommander de subir d'abord une coro-TDM. Les patients qui présentaient une co-ronaropathie obstructive ou dont les résultats se trouvaient tout juste à la limite de ce diagnostic lors de la coro-TDM se faisaient recommander une coronarographie invasive subséquente. L'acceptabilité de l'intervention, sa fidélité et son efficacité ont été évaluées. Résultats: Au total, 226 patients ont été sélectionnés et 186 ont été jugés admissibles. Parmi ces derniers, 166 ont accepté de subir la coro-TDM recommandée par le médecin (acceptabilité de 89 %). Parmi les patients ayant donné leur consentement, 156 (94 %) se sont d'abord soumis à une coro-TDM, et 43 (28 %) présentaient une coronaropathie obstructive ou des résultats limites selon cet examen. Seulement un patient ne présentant pas de coronaropathie ou présentant une coronaropathie non obstructive à la coro-TDM a été orienté vers une coronarographie invasive subséquente, contrairement au protocole (fidélité de 99 %). En tout, 119 des 156 patients s'étant d'abord soumis à une coro-TDM n'ont pas eu à subir une coronarographie invasive dans les 90 jours suivants (76 % d'entre eux ont potentiellement évité une coronarographie invasive grâce à cette première intervention). Parmi les 36 patients qui ont subi une coronarographie invasive après la coro-TDM, comme le recommandait le protocole, 24 présentaient une coronaropathie obstructive (rendement diagnostique de 66,7 %). Si tous les patients qui ont été orientés vers une coronarographie invasive et qui se sont soumis à cet examen dans l'un ou l'autre des centres entre juillet 2016 et février 2020 (n = 694 avant l'instauration; n = 333 après l'instauration) avaient d'abord passé une coro-TDM, une coronaropathie obstructive aurait été décelée lors de la coronarographie invasive chez 42 patients de plus par tranche de 100 patients (intervalle de confiance à 95 % : 26 à 59). Conclusion: Le recours à un processus de triage centralisé permettant de faire d'abord passer une coro-TDM aux patients ambulatoires dans une situation non urgente qui doivent subir une coronarographie invasive semble être un moyen acceptable et efficace de diagnostiquer la coronaropathie obstructive et d'améliorer l'efficacité dans notre système de santé.

Ultrasound-guided femoral access in patients with vascular closure devices: a prespecified analysis of the randomised UNIVERSAL trial.

BACKGROUND: Whether ultrasound (US)-guided femoral access compared to femoral access without US guidance decreases access site complications in patients receiving a vascular closure device (VCD) is unclear. AIMS: We aimed to compare the safety of VCD in patients undergoing US-guided versus non-US-guided femoral arterial access for coronary procedures. METHODS: We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the UNIVERSAL trial, a multicentre randomised controlled trial of 1:1 US-guided femoral access versus non-US-guided femoral access, stratified for planned VCD use, for coronary procedures on a background of fluoroscopic landmarking. The primary endpoint was a composite of major Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3 or 5 bleeding and vascular complications at 30 days. RESULTS: Of 621 patients, 328 (52.8%) received a VCD (86% ANGIO-SEAL, 14% ProGlide). In patients who received a VCD, those randomised to US-guided femoral access compared to non-US-guided femoral access experienced a reduction in major bleeding or vascular complications (20/170 [11.8%] vs 37/158 [23.4%], odds ratio [OR] 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.82). In patients who did not receive a VCD, there was no difference between the US- and non-US-guided femoral access groups, respectively (20/141 [14.2%] vs 13/152 [8.6%], OR 1.76, 95% CI: 0.80-4.03; interaction p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving a VCD after coronary procedures, US-guided femoral access was associated with fewer bleeding and vascular complications compared to femoral access without US guidance. US guidance for femoral access may be particularly beneficial when VCD are used.

No-reflow after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: an angiographic core laboratory analysis of the TOTAL Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal strategy to prevent no-reflow in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unknown. AIMS: We aimed to examine the effect of thrombectomy on the outcome of no-reflow in key subgroups and the adverse clinical outcomes associated with no-reflow. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the TOTAL Trial, a randomised trial of 10,732 patients comparing thrombectomy versus PCI alone. This analysis utilised the angiographic data of 1,800 randomly selected patients. RESULTS: No-reflow was diagnosed in 196 of 1,800 eligible patients (10.9%). No-reflow occurred in 95/891 (10.7%) patients randomised to thrombectomy compared with 101/909 (11.1%) in the PCI-alone arm (odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-1.28; p-value=0.76). In the subgroup of patients who underwent direct stenting, those randomised to thrombectomy compared with PCI alone experienced less no-reflow (19/371 [5.1%] vs 21/216 [9.7%], OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26-0.96). In patients who did not undergo direct stenting, there was no difference between the groups (64/504 [12.7%] vs 75/686 [10.9%)], OR 1.18, 95% CI: 0.82-1.69; interaction p-value=0.02). No-reflow patients had a significantly increased risk of experiencing the primary composite outcome (cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or NYHA Class IV heart failure) at 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio 1.70, 95% CI: 1.13-2.56; p-value=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI treated by PCI, thrombectomy did not reduce no-reflow in all patients but may be synergistic with direct stenting. No-reflow is associated with increased adverse clinical outcomes.

Early versus delayed invasive intervention in acute coronary syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Earlier trials have shown that a routine invasive strategy improves outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. However, the optimal timing of such intervention remains uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 3031 patients with acute coronary syndromes to undergo either routine early intervention (coronary angiography < or = 24 hours after randomization) or delayed intervention (coronary angiography > or = 36 hours after randomization). The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 6 months. A prespecified secondary outcome was death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia at 6 months. RESULTS: Coronary angiography was performed in 97.6% of patients in the early-intervention group (median time, 14 hours) and in 95.7% of patients in the delayed-intervention group (median time, 50 hours). At 6 months, the primary outcome occurred in 9.6% of patients in the early-intervention group, as compared with 11.3% in the delayed-intervention group (hazard ratio in the early-intervention group, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68 to 1.06; P=0.15). There was a relative reduction of 28% in the secondary outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia in the early-intervention group (9.5%), as compared with the delayed-intervention group (12.9%) (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.89; P=0.003). Prespecified analyses showed that early intervention improved the primary outcome in the third of patients who were at highest risk (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89) but not in the two thirds at low-to-intermediate risk (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.56; P=0.01 for heterogeneity). CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention did not differ greatly from delayed intervention in preventing the primary outcome, but it did reduce the rate of the composite secondary outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or refractory ischemia and was superior to delayed intervention in high-risk patients. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00552513.)